You are a 4, unless you can provide a picture of yourself in front of your computer with TLS open on your screen so we know its you.

For all I care you could call me .5. No pix for you.

Back to OPs depressing problems...

love the response. If you are hot enough to consider yourself an 8, humble enough not to give yourself a 10 on the internet (though you probably think you deserve it) and smart enough not to give a shit, you my friend must be hot.

You are a 4, unless you can provide a picture of yourself in front of your computer with TLS open on your screen so we know its you.

For all I care you could call me .5. No pix for you.

Back to OPs depressing problems...

love the response. If you are hot enough to consider yourself an 8, humble enough not to give yourself a 10 on the internet (though you probably think you deserve it) and smart enough not to give a shit, you my friend must be hot.

OperaSoprano wrote:Does this apply solely to physical appearance, or to all attributes?

(The problem is that attractive boys know they are attractive, and that is unattractive.)

Also, does this mean I am in the 7 range?

This.

It's also much harder to 10-scale a guy, because guys can do much more to enhance their physical appearance through the use of exercise. Let's take the example of a guy who is basically a 5: No major physical deformities and not a ginger, but really nothing special going on. All of a sudden, this guy starts hitting the gym all the time, gets biceps and abs. His 10-scale rating just went way up without any appreciable change to his otherwise-average face.

Girls, on the other hand, are far less lucky in this regard. They are generally expected to be in-shape, but excessive exercise doesn't raise their rating at all and might even lower it (a girl with bigger guns/nicer abs than me would freak me out--just don't be overweight). Although other factors (boobs mainly, exceptions made for a truly shapely ass) do play in, girls are more or less forced to play the hand they were dealt facially.

Thus, there is the potential that you might fall for a guy who is in the 4-6 range, knowing that with the right investment of time and effort he has the potential to put himself into the 6-8.5/9 range. Conversely, if a guy is rated highly because of his body, you need to use caution: Don't let him start skipping workouts and eating fast food just because he's getting laid regularly, or your 8.5 bf might be a 6 before you know it.

OperaSoprano wrote:Does this apply solely to physical appearance, or to all attributes?

(The problem is that attractive boys know they are attractive, and that is unattractive.)Also, does this mean I am in the 7 range?

This.

It's also much harder to 10-scale a guy, because guys can do much more to enhance their physical appearance through the use of exercise. Let's take the example of a guy who is basically a 5: No major physical deformities and not a ginger, but really nothing special going on. All of a sudden, this guy starts hitting the gym all the time, gets biceps and abs. His 10-scale rating just went way up without any appreciable change to his otherwise-average face.

Girls, on the other hand, are far less lucky in this regard. They are generally expected to be in-shape, but excessive exercise doesn't raise their rating at all and might even lower it (a girl with bigger guns/nicer abs than me would freak me out--just don't be overweight). Although other factors (boobs mainly, exceptions made for a truly shapely ass) do play in, girls are more or less forced to play the hand they were dealt facially.

Thus, there is the potential that you might fall for a guy who is in the 4-6 range, knowing that with the right investment of time and effort he has the potential to put himself into the 6-8.5/9 range. Conversely, if a guy is rated highly because of his body, you need to use caution: Don't let him start skipping workouts and eating fast food just because he's getting laid regularly, or your 8.5 bf might be a 6 before you know it.

/Begins to reconsider using the gym as a distraction from status checkers.

You speak an ugly truth sir.

Last edited by sapp on Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

OperaSoprano wrote:Does this apply solely to physical appearance, or to all attributes?

(The problem is that attractive boys know they are attractive, and that is unattractive.)

Also, does this mean I am in the 7 range?

This.

It's also much harder to 10-scale a guy, because guys can do much more to enhance their physical appearance through the use of exercise. Let's take the example of a guy who is basically a 5: No major physical deformities and not a ginger, but really nothing special going on. All of a sudden, this guy starts hitting the gym all the time, gets biceps and abs. His 10-scale rating just went way up without any appreciable change to his otherwise-average face.

Girls, on the other hand, are far less lucky in this regard. They are generally expected to be in-shape, but excessive exercise doesn't raise their rating at all and might even lower it (a girl with bigger guns/nicer abs than me would freak me out--just don't be overweight). Although other factors (boobs mainly, exceptions made for a truly shapely ass) do play in, girls are more or less forced to play the hand they were dealt facially.

Thus, there is the potential that you might fall for a guy who is in the 4-6 range, knowing that with the right investment of time and effort he has the potential to put himself into the 6-8.5/9 range. Conversely, if a guy is rated highly because of his body, you need to use caution: Don't let him start skipping workouts and eating fast food just because he's getting laid regularly, or your 8.5 bf might be a 6 before you know it.

OperaSoprano wrote:The problem is that attractive boys know they are attractive, and that is unattractive.

This reminds me of when the "10" overly confident guy asked me out and I refused without providing any good reason besides the fact that I was not in a mood. It took him ~20 minutes to clarify if I remembered who I was speaking with and how exactly he looked like. I mean he asked these questions at least 10 times. That was hilarious.

Last edited by TheLuckyOne on Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SoftBoiledLife wrote:Rayiner, I don't get to say this much to you, but the fundamental premise of your analysis here is flawed: You are neglecting the possibility that overreaching itself can often (within a certain boundary range) provide the requisite qualification. Sure, typically a 5 hitting on an 8 will be shot down, yes, but there exist a not insignificant amount of instances wherein the boldness required for a 5 to hit on an 8 will convey to that 8 that the 5-male possesses some quality enabling him to be in her league (usually the female will assume that this is some kind of intangible, such as money, coolness, intellect, etc.).

It it precisely because most people view overreaching as a suicide mission that it is so often successful (at least for men--women have a much harder time overreaching because men are inherently far more superficial and care less about intangibles). Women are apt to assume that overreaching is just not done, and therefore the guy is in their league. By the time they figure out the truth, it's often too late and an emotional attachment has formed.

From a chick, TITCR.

This. I don't know what number I get, but what I fall for generally (nerdiness/intellectual fireworks, vulnerability [cockiness = gigantic turnoff], and some "feeling" qualities) is not readily physically apparent. If someone has all that, his attractiveness number is just not going to matter.

OperaSoprano wrote:The problem is that attractive boys know they are attractive, and that is unattractive.

This reminds me of when the "10" overly confident guy asked me out and I refused without providing any good reason besides the fact that I was not in a mood. It took him ~20 minutes to clarify if I remembered who I was speaking with and how exactly he looked like. I mean he asked these questions at least 10 times. That was hilarious.